Here are Andew’s very grave concerns, which I present to you to bolster your morale. It’s just one poll, though, and Romney’s lead even there is barely outside the margin of error.
Don’t ever link to that man. He’s a horrible human being who should be shunned by all decent society for his woman-phobic and misogynistic lunacy.
Also, polls at this point should be taken just as seriously…
Andrew Sullivan is a bit of a drama queen, and certainly someone who takes copyright and the pagentry of election speech seriously. Obama’s now cast according to Nate Silver has always been above his election day forcast. (It still is). I have been wondering for a time how Nate Silver would get the Obama numbers from his now cast to dip to his projected election day numbers…and I am not saying that what Nate Silver does is pure science, but it is certainly the objective side of the New York Times.
Albeit even here, Nate Silver’s odds have always been above Intrade, and they have always been above the faux-bold 2-1 odds.
Is Andrew Sullivan suggesting that Nate Silver’s methodology is flawed and in this case clearly demonstrating a techno-bureaucratic liberal bias?
I just want to know who is going to send Beer to Nate Silver and get a subscription to the New York Times.
Mail (will not be published) (required)